DNV GL STRATEGIC RESEARCH & INNOVATION

POSITION PAPER 04-2015

SHIP
CONNECTIVITY

SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

2 Ship Connectivity

Acknowledgements:
The preparation of this position paper has been a joint effort
from the Maritime Transport Programme within DNV GL Strategic
Research and Innovation.

However, in order to include up to date information and obtain

relevant examples and views from different parts of the business,
the preparation of this manuscript has included discussions with
selected external partners, vendors, and experts.

In particular, we wish to acknowledge and thank the following

persons for their valuable input and discussions:

Peter Andersen (Cobham), Peter Broadhurst (Inmarsat),

Adrian Bull (COMSYS), Wouter Deknopper (Iridium LLC),
Bernt Fanghol (MCP), Capucine Fargier (Euroconsult),
Odd Gangås (OddARTTM), Stein Gudbjørgsrud (Telenor),
Carl Magne Rustand (Kongsberg Maritime Offshore),
Ørnulf Jan Rødseth (Marintek)

Lead author:
Steinar Låg

Contributors:
Bjørn-Johan Vartdal and Knut Erik Knutsen

Contact Details:
Steinar Låg, DNV GL
Steinar.Laag@dnvgl.com
 Ship Connectivity 3

CONTENT

INTRODUCTION 6

HISTORIC AND CURRENT DRIVERS 8

Distress and safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Navigational aid and reporting to authorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Operational applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Welfare and entertainment ................................................................................................... 9

STATE OF THE ART COMMUNICATION AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS 10

Terrestrial radio.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Mobile Satellite Systems (MSS) on L-band . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Terrestrial mobile systems.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Satellite VSAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Other innovations and trends. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

SHIP CONNECTIVITY IN THE FUTURE 24

The ever-increasing communications capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
The maritime VSAT boom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
New applications.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
New challenges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD 40

CONCLUSIONS 43

REFERENCES 44
4 Ship Connectivity

Traditionally, once ships had left port they were

isolated from communication with shore. This was
true until the introduction of radio on ships at the
beginning of the 20th century. Since then, both the
capacity and coverage of ship to shore communication
has been gradually evolving.

However, we are now experiencing a step change in

this field, with digital signals that can be transferred
from ship to shore, and in the reverse direction, at
significant rates, independent of the ship’s location.
This paper describes these latest developments and
the implications that they can have for shipping in the
21st century.
Ship Connectivity 5
6 Ship Connectivity

INTRODUCTION

Figure 1.  The transatlantic telegraph cable of 1865. Source: Atlantic-Cable.com


In 1865, the first successful transatlantic cable was
installed. It had the capacity of 8 words per minute,
which may seem absurd today, not to mention the
price of $10 per word ($134 at current values). Within
a decade, a network of cables linking major cities
around the world was in place.
By 1897, there were 162,000 nautical miles of cable,
with London at the centre of the network, being the
hub of the Commonwealth. This communications
network revolutionized shipping communications
and transformed the shipping industry. Before then,
vessels could lie idle in port for weeks waiting for
orders on what to take on board as return cargo. As
of mid-2012, the demonstrated design capacity of
existing transatlantic systems was 49.5 Terabytes per
second (Tbps).
The early capabilities of ship to shore communication
were limited to voice, Morse, and telex for
navigational and safety purposes. The capability and
coverage of these systems gradually evolved during
the 20th Century, and, in the 1990s, the Global
Maritime Distress Safety System (GMDSS) brought
the introduction of satellite communications and
simple, yet effective, digital messaging to support
distress alerting. The early capabilities of digital
communications were limited, but there has recently
been an unprecedented boost in communication
capabilities due to completely different drivers
emerging. Satellite broadband systems are
increasingly used for a variety of operational
commercial purposes, and also for leisure and
entertainment.
Ship Connectivity 7
Although “connectivity” is primarily to do with
communication, the term is meaningless unless we
also consider the data that is being communicated.
There are now vast amounts of a wide variety of data
on board a ship and these are generated from many
different sources. Many of the onboard systems
are designed for the purpose of collecting and
presenting data to the crew as vital aids for decision-
making during the ship’s daily operation.
As a result of the revolutions within sensors,
communication, and data analytics, we now
have “connected vessels”, with communication
infrastructures that enable the implementation of a
range of new applications based on the data now
available on board. Ship connectivity will act as an
enabler for these new applications by supporting
the data analytics from shore through expertise
and increased computational power. There is even
the potential for control of ship functionality from
shore. Applications may be capable of delivering key
benefits, such as better performance, and improved
reliability and safety, but these will also create new
challenges.
The era of ship connectivity is upon us and will make
a dramatic impact on ship operations as we know it
today. This paper aims to explore ship connectivity
in further detail, discuss the types of applications
that may be enabled by ship connectivity, and finally
present our view on how we, the maritime community,
should utilize this great opportunity with the aim of
making shipping safer, greener, and smarter.
8 Ship Connectivity
HISTORIC AND
CURRENT DRIVERS
Distress and safety
Historically, the primary driver for communication
between ship and shore has been the safety of crew
and passengers. Since the use of Morse telegraph
on board ships in the early 1900s, the ability to send
an alert message from a vessel in distress has saved
thousands of lives at sea.
In 1988, GMDSS was established to increase safety
and make it easier to rescue ships in distress.
Chapter IV of SOLAS [/3/] was introduced to define
required GMDSS functionalities and supporting
communications equipment, and is applicable to
all passenger vessels and cargo vessels above 300
gross tons that are engaged in international voyages.
GMDSS is mainly based on terrestrial radio systems
(VHF, MF, and HF) with no data service, and the
digital satellite communications systems used
(Inmarsat-C and EPIRB) have highly limited data rates
that are just suitable for supporting distress alerting
and safety messaging.
Since its introduction, GMDSS regulations have
remained relatively stable, and very little new
technology has been introduced. The International
Maritime Organization (IMO) is currently in the
process of reviewing the GMDSS requirements
with the aim of establishing an updated set of
modernised GMDSS requirements by 2017. [/5/]
Navigational aid and reporting to authorities
Communication is also used as a navigational aid
and for mandatory reporting to maritime authorities.
Examples include:
¾¾ Two-way voice communication (by radio or
satellite): this is, by itself, an essential navigational
aid as it enables navigators on the bridge to
exchange information with other vessels or shore-
based parties about route choice, weather, or
navigational hazards.
¾¾ Automatic Identification System (AIS): AIS
messages containing vessel ID, position, course,
and speed, are transmitted on dedicated channels
in the VHF band for collision avoidance purposes.
AIS messages are received by nearby vessels or
AIS base stations, and, in recent years, a satellite
overlay has been added (S-AIS) to increase
coverage.
¾¾ Long-range identification and tracking (LRIT): this
system requires vessels to report their ID position
to their flag administration four times a day,
typically done over satellite.
¾¾ Vessel traffic service (VTS): this is a marine traffic
monitoring system established by harbour or port
authorities, and is similar to air traffic control for
aircrafts. Typical VTS systems use radar, CCTV, AIS,

and VHF for two-way radio communications, to
keep track of vessel movements and to provide
navigational safety in a limited geographical area.
¾¾ Port arrival notifications (FAL requirements) and
different ship reporting schemes for port states:
these are, e.g., related to dangerous goods and
marine pollution.
As with GMDSS safety communications, the above
applications are mandated by regulations, and do
not require broadband data connections.
Operational applications
A different type of communication driver relates
to the main operational purpose of the vessel.
Unlike the drivers discussed already, this type
of communications application is not driven by
regulations, but rather deployed voluntarily in order
to optimize operations, thereby saving costs to
the shipowner or increasing service quality for the
charterer. Such operational applications could be:
¾¾ Cargo logistics and monitoring applications
¾¾ Route planning and energy efficiency applications
¾¾ Administrative communication between the vessel
and the shipowner’s HQ.
¾¾ Upload of gathered data (e.g. seismic data or
environmental data)
1945: A.C. Clarke
proposes Geo-satellites
1900
1895: Marconi invents the radio 1965: Intelsat “Early Bird”
Figure 2.  Maritime communication - key milestones
Ship Connectivity 9
Operational applications are highly dependent on the
type and purpose of the vessel and the applications’
requirements for latency and bandwidth will vary. For
example, the exchange of credit card transactions will
be an important operational application for a cruise
or passenger vessel. Although these transactions are
time-critical, data volumes are relatively low and do
not require much bandwidth.
Operational communications is a relatively modern
driver that has emerged over the last decade through
the age of digitization and satellite communications.
Operational applications have been a key driver
for shipowners to invest in new broadband
communication capabilities on board their ships.
Welfare and entertainment
Welfare and entertainment for crew and passengers
has been one of the strongest drivers for investment
in advanced communications equipment in recent
years. Shipowners have learnt that to attract the best
crew, provision of TV and Internet is essential. Who
wants to be stuck for weeks on an offshore vessel
without being able to connect with friends and
family on Facebook when off-duty? And who wants
to spend the holiday on a cruise liner where it is not
possible to check your emails or see your favourite
team in the Champions League? Our modern digital
habits have clearly influenced this development, and
so have the falling costs and increased competition
within satellite communication.
1976: IMO establishes Inmarsat 2011: >10 000 VSATs
1950 2000
1992–1999: GMDSS deployment
10 Ship Connectivity

STATE OF THE ART

COMMUNICATION
AND FUTURE
DEVELOPMENTS

Terrestrial radio These legacy radio systems are typically operated

Existing systems
The terrestrial radio-systems VHF, MF, and HF are well
known and established in the maritime community,
and are cornerstones of the mandatory GMDSS
requirements for SOLAS vessels. The services
provided over these systems are quite similar;
¾¾ Duplex voice service, with digital selective calling
(DSC) for automated call setup
¾¾ Distress alerting capability
¾¾ Telex with printing facilities
The differences between the systems relate to the
frequency bands used and the coverage areas.
SYSTEM/BAND TYPICAL COVERAGE
FROM EARTH STATION
by maritime authorities on a non-commercial basis,
and are offered to the maritime community as a free
service.
Barriers
Although a free service is beneficial for mariners, the
maritime authorities do not drive the development
of maritime broadband communications. This lack
of drive and “technology push” is a barrier, and
probably a key reason for the lack of data services in
the VHF, MF, and HF bands. The bandwidth available
in these bands is severely limited anyway, so any new
data-service will remain narrow-band compared with
the alternatives (satellite and terrestrial mobile).
Other barriers include service coverage, which is
limited to a distance from the shore base stations
(VHF and MF), and the service quality, which is
limited for long-range connections (HF).

VHF 40 - 60 nautical miles New systems and innovations

MF 150 - 200 nautical miles
Worldwide (given appropriate
HF
conditions & frequency)
Table 1.  Typical coverage of radio systems
Due to the barriers mentioned, technology
development on the legacy radio-systems is
generally limited. However VDES (VHF Data
Exchange System) is a promising initiative to provide
a digital data service based on the existing terrestrial
VHF radio infrastructure. IALA (The International
Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and
Lighthouse Authorities) have proposed VDES, with
 Ship Connectivity 11

VSAT
C Ku Ka
4-8 8-12 27-40
GHz GHz GHz

Mobile L
satellite 1-2
GHz

Terrestrial UHF
mobile 300MHz -3GHz

Terrestrial MF HF VHF
radio 300kHz-3MHz 3-30 MHz 30-300 MHz

100 kHz 1 MHz 10 MHz 100 MHz 1 GHz 10 GHz 100 GHz

Figure 3.  Frequency bands relevant for maritime communications

the aim of offloading the VHF Data Link (VDL) of AIS

and creating a new channel for data exchange, to
support new e-Navigation applications. [/43/] VDES
is based on ITU-R M.1842-1. This defines more
spectrum-efficient modem techniques and higher
data rates (up to 307.2 kbps per 100 kHz), which is
32 times the speed and 8 times the efficiency of the
existing AIS channels (9.6 kbps per 25 kHz).

There are several attractive aspects of VDES.

Assuming that it will be built on the existing
operational model and infrastructure of VHF, service
coverage will be optimized towards maritime use,
with a service that is free to use for mariners. With
its limited data rates, VDES will not be a suitable
alternative for commercial and bandwidth-hungry
applications that are better served by satellite and
4G. However, VDES may become a viable solution
for e-Navigation applications such as VTS (Vessel
Traffic Service), distribution of MSI (Maritime Safety
Information), and different types of narrow-band
ship-to-shore reporting applications e.g. cargo
indications and piracy reports.
Figure 4.  Inmarsat products; FleetBroadband (left) and
Inmarsat-C (right). Source: Sailor/Cobham
stationary orbit (35,786 km altitude) and gateways
connected to public networks. Inmarsat’s system
design has traditionally been in-house and they have
created their own proprietary products, generating
traffic on their satellites. Inmarsat takes an active
role in operations, distribution, and sales, but still
considers itself as a “wholesaler” based on a wide
international network of distribution partners.

Mobile Satellite Systems (MSS) on L-band
Existing systems
Since its founding in 1976, Inmarsat has been a
reliable provider of satellite communications services
to the maritime community. Inmarsat owns and
operates a network of L-band satellites in Geo-
Inmarsat provides a wide range of maritime services
over their L-band satellites. Inmarsat-C is a low-rate
messaging product that was launched in 1992, and
that typically forms part of the equipment set-up
for GMDSS vessels. Fleet Broadband is a family of
broadband products launched in 2007, designed
12 Ship Connectivity
Figure 5.  Iridium’s constellation of 66 LEO satellites.
Source: Iridium Satellite LLC
for the Inmarsat-4 satellites and providing 3G-type
services up to 500 kbps. [/9/, /76/]
The strengths of the current Inmarsat products
are reliability, coverage, and a streamlined way of
delivering services. Inmarsat is the dominant player,
with ~90 % market share within mobile satellite
systems (L-band). [/7/]
Like Inmarsat, Iridium is an L-band satellite operator,
but Iridium’s satellites are in Low Earth Orbit (LEO),
at approximately 780 km altitude. Iridium became
operational in 1998 with a constellation of 66
satellites. The Iridium satellites can communicate
directly with neighbouring satellites via Inter-satellite
links (ISL), thus reducing the need for gateways and
on-ground switching. The satellites have an orbital
speed of 27000 km/s, use 100 minutes to orbit the
earth, and approximately 8 minutes to cross the
horizon as seen from a fixed location on the ground.
This creates system challenges such as Doppler
effects, and satellite handovers during user sessions.
Iridium’s key strength is that the constellation
of constantly moving LEO satellites provides
continuous coverage over the entire surface of the
Earth, including Polar regions. [/8/]
Thuraya is a regional L-band system using two
Geo-satellites, providing maritime products such as
OrionIP, with IP data capabilities that are similar to
those of Inmarsat’s Fleet-Broadband. [/27/]
OrbComm operates a satellite network of 29 LEO
satellites at 775 km altitude, optimized to support
M2M (machine-to-machine) applications. Unlike the
other MSS providers operating in L-band, OrbComm
is the only licensee operating in 137-150 MHz VHF
band, which was allocated globally for “Little LEO”
systems. [/4/]
Barriers
The MSS satellite communications market suffers
from poor competition, with Inmarsat as the
dominant player, partly based on its unique position
in GMDSS.
Given the market situation and the relatively little
bandwidth available for MSS systems on L-band, user
data rates are relatively limited and prices are quite
high. Inmarsat and Iridium have done a good job in
making products that provide a few hundred of kbps,
but at high charges and with comparatively limited
throughputs compared with very small aperture
terminal (VSAT) systems and terrestrial options.
Regulations and standards are trailing behind
technological and commercial developments. The
only MSS product with any substantial status within
GMDSS is Inmarsat-C. This was launched in 1992
and is limited to messaging applications. Regulators

have not yet utilized MSS products’ broadband
capabilities to enhance safety, navigation, and to
protect the environment. Despite unique Polar
coverage and success with voice and M2M tracking
applications, Iridium has taken 17 years to become
considered for inclusion as a GMDSS operator.
Finally, lack of available spectrum on L-band is a
barrier that will constrain further growth of these
systems and, as a result, MSS operators like Inmarsat
and Iridium are moving to higher frequency bands
for their new systems.
New systems and innovations
Due to the lack of spectrum, new large-scale
investments or future deployments in broadband
capabilities at L-band should not be expected.
L-band MSS products will still have an important
role in the future, but for any new developments the
emphasis is likely to be on narrow-band messaging
and tracking applications with smaller terminals,
while higher frequency bands (VSAT Ku and Ka) will
be the main arena for broadband developments.
Terrestrial mobile systems
Existing systems
Terrestrial-based mobile communications have
enjoyed enormous growth for land users over
the last two decades, and base stations along the
coast also handle maritime traffic. The current 3G
coverage extends out to around 10 nautical miles
(nm), whilst 2G services reach out 20 nm and even
further in some places. [/21/] Given appropriate power
and antenna configuration and the use of 800-900
MHz band, 4G (LTE) services may reach 100 km (50
nm), although with reduced data rates. Whilst typical
3G data speeds are in the order of a few Mbps, new 4G
technologies such as LTE can provide over 100Mbps. [/17/]
Although these coverage ranges are slightly shorter
than VHF for plain voice communications, the cellular
systems provide useful data connectivity for smaller
vessels, such as yachts and fishing vessels, travelling
along the shore. They are also a valuable alternative
for deep-sea cargo vessels approaching or leaving
port, should the VSAT be blocked from view of
the satellite due to mountains, buildings, or other
obstructions.
There are also other mobile broadband concepts
at the national and regional levels. One example is
ICE, a Scandinavian mobile broadband service using
code division multiple access (CDMA) over 450 MHz,
the band previously used for analogue mobile
Ship Connectivity 13
telephony. Due to the propagation characteristics
of this band, maritime coverage may reach as far as
120 km from shore, with healthy data speeds in the
Mbps range. [/26/]
Wi-Fi is another terrestrial mobile technology
that plays a significant role, at least on a “hot
spot”-basis. Wi-Fi is defined as wireless local area
network (WLAN) products based on the IEEE 802.11
standards and use on non-regulated spectrum at
2.4GHz and 5GHz [/75/]. In recent years there have
been several examples of Wi-Fi-network deployment
in ports e.g. Vladivostok (Russia), Rotterdam
(Netherlands) and Auckland (New Zealand). [/25/]
Such IP zones are typically set up by flag states or
port authorities to facilitate mandatory reporting,
e.g. port clearance, or by telecom operators to
provide Internet access as a paid service. As Wi-Fi is
unlicensed, service offerings can be established very
cost effectively, with low or no user charges. WiMAX
(Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access)
is another interoperable wireless communication
standard (IEEE 802.16) that has been used by the
Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA)
to provide a subscriber service called WISEPORT
in Singapore port, based on licensed spectrum on
2.3 GHz, providing 15 km coverage and download
data rates in the range of 512 kbps-8 Mbps.[/23/,/24/]
Barriers
Terrestrial systems have some natural coverage
limitations that mean that they are unable to
support vessels during the “deep sea” part of their
voyages, so for most vessels a terrestrial mobile
communication capacity is only relevant as part
of a communication mix, i.e. one out of several
communication options.
Unlike operators of the legacy radio systems,
terrestrial-based cellular operators are both
commercially focused and technologically advanced.
However, their primary focus is land-based users and
applications, implying that the maritime segment
is not prioritized regarding rollout strategies and
applications development.
Another barrier is traffic costs. Although the user’s
investments in terminals are attractively low, the
operator’s investments in terrestrial base stations
and licensed spectrum will require payback through
the user’s traffic bills. Anyone travelling abroad with
a mobile phone has learnt to be cautious in order to
avoid hefty international roaming charges.
14 Ship Connectivity

The 3GPP standards are expected to drive future

mobile terminal development, which means that
terminal cost and availability will be experienced as
a barrier for other variants of mobile technologies
that deviate from the mainstream standards.
With the global adoption of 3GPP-defined 4G/
LTE technologies, this will be a challenge for
technologies such as ICE and WiMAX as these
require special modems.

Wi-Fi remains a highly capable and cost-effective

option for “hot spots”, but any unlicensed band brings
with it quality of service related challenges. According
to research by the Greenwich Maritime Institute,
cybersecurity concerns are the main reason for the slow
uptake of Wi-Fi and WiMAX networks in ports [/25/].

New systems and innovations

An interesting recent development is deployment of
mobile picocells on board vessels. These concepts
are based on establishing a 2G/3G base station
(picocell) on board the vessel, enabling access
to 2G/3G capable devices by standard roaming
functionality. On-Waves (Iceland) [/29)] and Maritime
Communications Partner (MCP) (Norway) [/30)] are two
companies delivering such solutions, which have
become quite popular within the passenger / cruise
segment. The key advantage with these systems
is that users can simply use their personal cellular
devices, but usage is relatively expensive due to the
use of VSAT backhaul and international roaming
charges.

MCP are also involved in another interesting

deployment of mobile technology in the maritime
sector, as they are planning a rollout of a LTE (4G)
network on the Norwegian continental shelf. [/22/]
The main objective is to provide communication
for people and systems on the platform, but with a
service coverage radius of up to 30-40 nm of the
surrounding sea areas, many passing vessels may
also benefit from the service, which will be accessible
by standard cellular equipment and roaming
functionality. Such an offshore 4G-network will make
it possible for offshore supply vessels to remain
within 4G-coverage during offshore operation, as
well as during much of the time in-transit to and from
port.
It is not only telecom operators who recognize the 4G
offshore opportunity; in a recent spectrum auction
in Norway, the oil and gas operator, Statoil, acquired
a license for 10 MHz of 4G spectrum in the 900 MHz
band for the Norwegian continental shelf. [/50/]
Figure 6.  MCP’s planned 4G coverage on Norwegian shelf.
Source: MCP
Innovations using unlicensed Wi-Fi technologies
should also be expected. With solutions addressing
cybersecurity and quality of service, the importance
of IP zones in ports may increase in the maritime
communication mix.
Ongoing research is investigating the deployment of
Wi-Fi technologies in different ways. Hazra and Seah
(2010) defined a mesh network concept in which Wi-
Fi links were deployed as part of a wireless backbone
infrastructure. Mesh nodes, consisting of a Wi-Fi base
station and highly directive antennae, are mounted
on buoys to provide connectivity by multi-hop to
vessels approaching or departing port. [/51/]

Satellite VSAT
Existing systems
VSAT is a larger type of terminal operating towards
geosynchronous satellites on C-, Ku- and Ka-
bands. [/77/] The majority of VSAT antennae range
from 60 cm to 1.2 m. Given the large amounts of
available spectrum on these bands, data rates are
considerably higher and traffic costs significantly
lower than L-band systems like Inmarsat and Iridium.
Due to the ship movements, a maritime VSAT
antenna needs an accurate and reliable stabilization
and tracking mechanism to ensure that the directive
beam points continuously towards the satellite.
Typical VSAT offerings can provide data speeds of up
to 6 Mbit/s, and the typical subscription will involve
a monthly lease with a cap on a certain data volume.
The subscription fee will depend on the satellite dish
size, coverage, and bandwidth – and also whether
the data rates are provided on a guaranteed or
best effort basis. A typical VSAT subscription costs
between $1000 and $5000, with incremental traffic
costs at <$1/per MB. [/31/]
Ship Connectivity 15
In contrast to MSS at L-band, the VSAT market is
highly competitive and has been an active arena for
many commercial and technological developments
in recent years. VSAT service providers typically
bundle packages with modem, antenna, and a
satellite resource lease from a satellite operator such
as Eutelsat, Intelsat, or Telenor. Satellites delivering
VSAT services are typically in geostationary orbit,
implying that service quality deteriorates beyond 70º
latitude. However, with clever antenna installations
and link budget margins, it is possible to offer
acceptable service quality as far as 75-78º North.
Due to the lower antenna gain, VSAT services on
C-band provide excellent deep-sea coverage due
to wide beams covering large sea areas, but also
require larger ship antennae. Over the last years Ku-
band coverage has improved, and can now offer a
very cost-effective alternative to C-Band. On Ka-band
there are still only a few satellites, but due to the
amount of bandwidth available, and the potential
efficiency benefits from the higher antenna gain, the
prices have the potential to drop below those of Ku
in the longer term.
16 Ship Connectivity
Barriers
The main barrier for the adoption of VSAT is the
size and cost of the end-user equipment. Due
to advanced terminal electronics and the large
stabilized antenna platform, equipment and
installation costs for a maritime VSAT installation
are typically in the range $50-$100k, which is much
higher than L-band products. So far only heavy data
users have found this initial investment worthwhile,
which explains why there are considerably fewer
VSAT installations than smaller, cheaper, and more
narrow-band L-band products.
Although VSAT is much better than MSS L-band
in terms of cost per bit and available bandwidth,
Ku-band allocations have been filling up, and there
are many on-going regulatory fights for spectrum.
So cost and bandwidth are still bottlenecks, making
it expensive to accommodate bandwidth hungry
applications in a maritime setting.
Figure 7.  The second Global Xpress satellite – Inmarsat-5 F2 – launched in Kazakhstan on February 1st 2015.
Source: International Launch Services/Inmarsat
Regarding rules, regulations, and standards for
functionality and performance related to VSAT, there
is a vacuum; virtually nothing exists in the public
domain. Statutory regulations concerning GMDSS
and navigational safety simply do not recognize
VSAT as a communication option. For emerging non-
safety related connectivity applications there is also
a need to document best practices and standardize
interfaces to ensure effective, future-proof
implementations and to achieve vendor competition
and economies of scale.
Another challenge for VSAT is the susceptibility to
rain fade due to the absorption of microwave radio
frequency signals by atmospheric rain, snow, or ice.
This effect is significant above 11 GHz, and hence
especially challenging for Ka-band. Operators need
to plan in link margins or other mitigations in order
to avoid reduced service reliability.

Figure 8.  Iridum NEXT satellite. Source: Iridium Satellite LLC
New systems and innovations
Inmarsat Global Xpress: Inmarsat’s 5th generation of
satellites (three I-5 satellites launched in 2013-2015)
will support a new network called Global Xpress
(GX), with a global network entering commercial
service early in the second half of 2015. [/49/]
With Ka-band satellites built by Boeing, Inmarsat
are entering the VSAT world with a new maritime
service called Fleet Xpress. The Fleet Xpress service
includes a FleetBroadband terminal together with
1m or 60 cm GX Ka-band parabola, that, according to
Inmarsat, is capable of delivering data rates of up to
5 Mbps/50 MBps (uplink/downlink) over all maritime
trading routes. Inmarsat anticipates equipment pricing
for GX to be in line with that for equivalent Ku-band
VSAT devices. The system design has been delivered
to Inmarsat by iDirect, who also delivers a “Core
Module” that may be licensed to other manufacturers
for incorporation in their products. Rain fading is a
well-known problem for Ka-band, but the Fleet Xpress
system has built-in adaptive code modulation so
that the data rate can change with variable signal-to-
noise levels. The GX system is designed for a target
availability of 99 %, but the experienced availability
should be higher as FleetBroadband (L-band) may be
used as backup. [/76/,/80/]
Iridium Next: Iridium’s current satellite segment
is approaching end-of-life, and Iridium will be
launching new satellites from mid-2015 onwards.
Ship Connectivity 17
Like Iridium’s current satellite constellation, Iridium
NEXT will deploy a cross-linked mesh architecture
with 66 LEO satellites providing continuous global
coverage, including the Polar regions. A new feature
with the Iridium Next satellites is that in addition to
L-band transponder to support existing products, it
will also contain a Ka-Band transponder to support
new broadband services. [/48/]
In February 2015, Iridium announced their plans to
launch Certus, a new broadband service on the NEXT
satellites delivering data rates of up to 1.4 Mbps, an
impressive 10-fold increase on Iridium Openport.
Iridium have partnered with experienced vendors,
including Cobham Satcom and Rockwell Collins,
to provide the new broadband offering, which is
planned to be available towards the end of 2016.[/16/]
Intelsat EpicNG: Intelsat’s new high-throughput
satellites initiative is called Intelsat EpicNG. The new
satellites will have C-, Ku-, and Ka-transponders,
complementing their existing fleet of around 50 C-
and Ku-band satellites. The two first EpicNG satellites,
Intelsat 29e and Intelsat 33e, are expected to be
in-service in 2016. According to Intelsat, the new
EpicNG platform will provide 3-5 times more capacity
per satellite than their traditional fleet. The expected
throughput of the satellites will vary according to
application and satellite, but is expected to be in the
range of 25-60 Gbps, typically 10 times higher than
the traditional fleet. [/10/]
18 Ship Connectivity
Figure 9.  Intelsat EpicNG Coverage map. Source: Intelsat
As Intelsat is an existing VSAT satellite operator
on C- and Ku-band, it is in the position to make
complementary service offerings by combining C-,
Ku- and Ka-band from existing and new satellites,
in order to utilize the strengths and mitigate the
weaknesses of each band. In many ways, Intelsat’s
investment in the new EpicNG satellites can be
considered a low-risk, organic extension of their
existing operations. While Inmarsat are designing
their Fleet Xpress product with a closed group of
partners under contract, Intelsat takes a more “open”
and collaborative approach, allowing customers to
design product offerings that exploit the new satellite
capabilities, such as mesh networks, with guaranteed
data rates and special service attributes.
The O3b Satellite Constellation is a new Ka-Band
system that started operation in September 2014. [/11/]
Eight satellites have been launched, and another
four are scheduled for launch in 2015. The satellites
are in Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) at 8063 km
altitude, and each is equipped with 12 fully steerable
Ka-band antennae, using a total of 4.3 GHz of
spectrum corresponding to a throughput of 12 Gbps
per satellite. According to O3b, their system is
low-latency (130 ms round trip) and connectivity
speeds are over 500 Mbit/s, making it a potent
communication alternative. O3Bs approach for
maritime is to track vessels with steerable spot
beams, providing the tracked vessel with data rates
up to 350 Mbps. The scalability of this approach
has been questioned as O3B’s satellites have only
12 steerable spot beams, but may prove viable
for larger cruise vessels with huge communication
needs. O3B’s service coverage is limited beyond
+/- 45º latitude, and there is no service beyond
+/- 62º.
WorldVu Satellites Ltd recently secured regulatory
approval for 2 GHz Ku-band spectrum for their new
initiative, OneWeb, a proposed constellation of
approximately 700 small LEO-satellites to provide
global internet broadband to homes and mobile
platforms. The satellites, each with a weight of 125 kg
and data throughput of 8 Gbps, will orbit at 1200 km
altitude. The system is estimated to require about
$3bn by the time the full constellation becomes
operational in 2019-2020. [/18/,/19/]

SpaceX: On a similar note, Elon Musk, CEO and
founder of satellite launch provider SpaceX, recently
announced on Twitter that SpaceX is in the early
stages of developing “advanced micro-satellites
operating in large formations”. [/20/] In January 2015,
the Seattle Times reported that SpaceX would be
starting up a new satellite development facility in
Seattle, with the initial focus on developing low-cost,
high-performance satellites to be used by SpaceX in
a new, space-based internet communication system
supporting the backhaul communications and local
internet traffic in high-density cities. The constellation
is said to consist of 4000 satellites and the goal is
to have the initial satellite constellation in orbit and
operational in approximately 2020. [/55/, /56/]
There are a number of on-going HTS (High
Throughput Satellites) initiatives, but many are
focused on land-based markets and fixed installations
for TV broadcast distribution. However, some HTS will
also have return transponders to provide interactive
services over maritime regions. One example is
Telenor Satellite Broadcasting’s new HTS “Thor
VII” that will provide maritime VSAT connectivity
Ship Connectivity 19
Thor VII
Telenor's new HTS
"Thor VII" inspected
in factory.
Source: Telenor Satellite
Broadcasting
across the North Sea, Red Sea, Baltic Sea, and the
Mediterranean, as well as the North Atlantic.
Thor VII was launched in April 2015 and will offer
6-9 Gbps throughput, with up to 25 simultaneously
active spot beams. According to Telenor, service
offerings will include download speeds in the tens
of Mbps and uplink speeds in the range 2-6 Mbps
(depending upon antenna size). [/13/]
Other examples of new HTS systems providing
maritime coverage include ViaSat2, covering
large parts of the North Atlantic [/15/], and Telesat’s
Vantage 12 that was launched in late 2015 to provide
coverage to high traffic maritime zones in the
Mediterranean, North Sea, Caribbean, and South
Atlantic. [/14/]
20 Ship Connectivity

MCP
VSAT Earth
modem station

MPC
MPC Control
MCP platform
system
site antenna / BTS
3G/4G Operator
modem
MDLB Pick-up antenna Shore side Public shore
900-2500 Mhz antenna / BTS based network
WLAN
ICE Operator
modem
Pick-up Shore side
antenna 450Mhz antenna / BTS

WiFi/ Port WiFi/

WiMax WiMax
modem

Figure 10.  Communication broker solutions from MCP (left) and Inmarsat (right). Sources: MCP and Inmarsat Plc

Other innovations and trends
Communication broker
Given the diversity of communications options
becoming available to the maritime market, further
growth of communication broker applications,
capable of working with several underlying
communication bearers of different capabilities and
characteristics, should be expected.
The communication broker selects which
communication bearer to use according to
predefined selection logic and selection criteria.
Some of these criteria may be related to bearer
capabilities, such as availability, cost, bandwidth, and
latency. Others will be related to characteristics of the
data to be transferred, such as data size, urgency, or
priority. For example, a short, urgent data message
will be sent immediately on any bearer available,
whereas a non-urgent, voluminous transfer of raw
data may be deferred until a cheap broadband
alternative is available, e.g. 4G or Wi-Fi in port. The
communication broker may also take responsibility
for pre-processing of data, compression etc.
The broker functionality may also include resource
management functions, such as reserving parts
of the available broadband capacity for different
applications. Critical applications related to safety
could be given reserved slots of bandwidth, and
the broker could use preemption logic to suppress
or deny traffic from less critical applications (e.g.
Facebook) in case the bandwidth is needed for
urgent purposes.
 Ship Connectivity 21

Inmarsat
GX

FB

GX FB

NSD
Immarsat Core Network

In this way, the communication broker will form an between the Ka- and L-band services, and also
abstraction layer, leaving higher-level applications provide functionality such as firewall, transmission
to remain agnostic about which underlying control protocol (TCP)-acceleration, and VoIP (Voice
communication bearers to use. Furthermore, the user over IP). [/49/,/80/]
will have a seamless experience, allowing the focus
to be on the application’s intended purpose, without These are two examples of communication brokers,
having to worry about switching systems, antenna and, given a future environment of multiple and
pointing, and similar. diverse communication options, we can expect
increasing use of similar solutions to improve cost-
A communication broker solution from MCP, efficiency, ease-of-use and reliability of connectivity
providing least-cost routing over multiple bearers applications.
ranging from Wi-Fi to VSAT, is shown in Figure 10
(left). The right part of Figure 10 shows how Inmarsat
will integrate the existing FleetBroadband service on
L-band to enhance and complement the GX Ka-band
service in a hybrid configuration. Here, a shipboard
network service device will monitor and route traffic
22 Ship Connectivity
New antenna technologies
A major source of cost and complexity of maritime
antenna platforms is the stabilization and steering
mechanisms required to keep the antenna
continuously pointed towards the satellite. Phased
array antennae are composites (arrays) of antenna
elements where the total gain and directivity can be
changed by applying signals of different phases to
the various elements. This concept allows electronic
steering of the antenna lobe and removes the
need for moving parts, making it very attractive
for maritime use. One example is the new MTenna
product developed by Kymeta Corporation, that uses
new elctromagnetic metamaterials technology to
steer beams from a thin and flat antenna the size of a
large pizza box. [/45/]
Advances in antenna design techniques have
enabled the creation of multi-band antennae, with
the capability of operating on several different
frequency bands. As an example, the new iPhone 6
models A1586 and A1524 support 20 LTE (4G)
frequency bands ranging from 700 MHz to
2600 MHz, in addition to eight legacy 2G and 3G
bands for backwards compatibility. [/46/]
Figure 11.  mTenna – a phased array antenna based on metamaterials. Source: Kymeta Corp.
New antenna concepts will not only result in
user equipment being cheaper, neater and more
capable, but we should also expect that new antenna
technologies will be deployed in satellites and base
stations in order to optimize coverage areas and
focus the energy in small spots and cells. This will
allow better spectrum reuse and result in increased
traffic capacities and lower traffic costs.
Satellite imaging
Video surveillance is an ever-increasing and
controversial application in large parts of society,
and, with Google Earth and Street View, Google
has demonstrated the information value of pictures.
Satellites are already used for information gathering
and intelligence, but companies like Satellogic
intend to make imaging cheaper, more effective and
accessible by using a network of small 50 kg nano-
satellites. [/12/] Satellogic’s vision is to image any spot
on Earth every few minutes and to provide easy, low-
cost access to the image data to enable a variety of
monitoring applications.
 Ship Connectivity 23

Another example is Skybox Imaging [/57/], which was
bought by Google in August 2014. With small and
low-cost satellites, Skybox provides high-resolution
satellite images, and video and analytics services.
The resolution of the company’s images and videos
is sufficiently high that objects that impact on the
global economy, like terrain, cars, and shipping
containers, can be observed. Skybox says that its
satellites can capture video clips lasting up to 90
seconds at 30 frames per second. [/58/]
Another potential application is extraction of
environmental information such as wind and waves
from satellite images. There is ongoing research to
retrieve Significant Wave Height (SWH) data from
satellite-based altimeter measurements, and this may
become a valuable complement or alternative to
ship-based measurements. [/52/]

It is easy to envisage how systems like Satellogic

and Skybox may be used for maritime applications
such as vessel traffic monitoring, pirate tracking, or
collision avoidance. For example, the existing AIS
system relies solely on ship-initiated transmissions,
but this could be enriched with, or replaced by,
imaging data.

Figure 12.  High resolution image of Liberty Island, New York. Source: Skybox Imaging, Inc.
24 Ship Connectivity
SHIP CONNECTIVITY
IN THE FUTURE
The ever-increasing communications capacity
An unseen, yet empirically unmistakable force, driving
the cost and capacity of communications is the regular
doubling in capacity of any information-related
technology. This pattern was first identified by Gordon
Moore, who, in 1965, formulated what is now known
as Moore’s law [/60/]; this law states that the density of
transistors on a chip doubles roughly every 2 years.
This has held true up until today, although it has been
discussed when this would hit the limit and it is not
physically possible to cram any more components
into a given area. Such doubling patterns lead to an
exponential development of any domain, technology,
or industry that becomes information enabled.
Communications is a technology that is highly
information enabled, and there are several empirical
‘laws’ dictating the development in capacity:
¾¾ Butters’ Law of Photonics says the amount of data
coming out of a fibre doubles every nine months. [/60/]
¾¾ Nielsen’s Law of Internet Bandwidth states that a
high-end user’s connection speed grows by 50 %
per year. [/59/]
¾¾ Cooper’s Law of Spectral Efficiency states that
the maximum number of voice conversations
or equivalent data transactions that can be
conducted in all of the useful radio spectrum over
a given area doubles every 30 months. [/62/]
¾¾ Edholm’s Law of Bandwidth considers wireless,
nomadic, and wireline internet connections
and asserts that: “the three telecommunications
categories march almost in lock step: their data
rates increase on similar exponential curves,
the slower rates trailing the faster ones by a
predictable time lag.” [/61/]
The growth rates of nomadic and wireless
corresponds to annual growth rates of more than
60 %, and, extrapolating forwards, indicate a
convergence of the rates of nomadic and wireless
technologies in around 2030.
Martin Cooper, a mobile phone inventor and the
man behind Cooper’s Law, wrote the following in his
position paper “The myth of spectrum scarcity” in
2010 [/64/]:
“When Guglielmo Marconi conducted the
first radio transmissions in 1895, the energy
from his spark-gap transmitter occupied the
entire usable radio spectrum. In 1901, his first
transatlantic transmission blanketed an area of
more than 100 million square miles. Yet it sent
only about one bit every six seconds—and the
earth’s surface could accommodate only few
such transmissions at a time.”
 Ship Connectivity 25

Wireline Nomadic Wireless

100 Mb/s
Ethernet
Billion
2.94 Mb/s 10 Mb/s 802.llg
Ethernet Ethernet
1 Gb/s
Ethernet

802.llb MIMO

Million

UMTS

110- b/s 9600> b/s

Hayes modem Hayes modem Ricochet radio modem

56 Kb/s
modem
Thousand
28.8 Kb/s
GSM modem
Bits per second

Wide-area paging First alphanumeric pager

1976 1984 1992 2000 2008

Figure 13.  Edholm’s law, the exponential development of three internet connection technologies marching in lock-step.
Source: IEEE Spectrum [/63/]

“Since 1901, for instance, spectral efficiency
in telephone communications has improved
by a factor of about one trillion. Since 1948, it
has improved a million times over. And when
introduced in 1983, cellular communications
immediately offered a ten-fold increase in
spectrum capacity—by transmitting in 30 MHz
of spectrum what would have taken 300 MHz
to transmit with the previous generation of
technology. Today’s cellular systems are better
than 100 times more efficient than the mobile
telephones of the 1980s.”
continued technological innovations, and concludes
that the spectrum should not be viewed as a scarce
resource.
In the simplest terms, the above laws tell us that we
should expect a continued exponential growth in
the data transfer capacity available to ships and that
current bandwidth limitations will disappear to allow
the internet of things and broadband applications
in terrestrial networks to expand into all sea-going
activity.

Cooper’s point is that history shows that mobile
communications grow exponentially, and that this
growth has always been accommodated by the
introduction of smarter technologies that improve
spectral efficiency and expand the practical useable
frequency range. Examples of technological
advances are smart antennae, smaller cells (allowing
frequency re-use), more efficient modem and
compression techniques, improved multiple access
schemes etc. Cooper predicts that the usable
spectrum will continue to scale to the demand due to
The maritime VSAT boom
The exponential growth laws take a top-down
approach and do not consider the physical
limitations of any technology, and, although they
deal with wireless shared-bandwidth systems,
they do not consider maritime communications
specifically. Therefore it is useful to take a bottom-
up perspective by looking at numbers for maritime
VSAT, the key communication bearer for ship
connectivity.
26 Ship Connectivity

In 2013, 95 % of the 350,000 active maritime satellite
terminals were narrowband L-band terminals
(Inmarsat and Iridium), used for safety and regulatory
compliance. However, as the current growth is driven
by broadband applications and increasing data
usage, there is a strong increase in installations of
maritime VSAT.
Figures from COMSYS show that the number of
maritime VSAT installations in service increased from
6001 in 2008 to 21,922 in 2014, corresponding to
an annual growth rate of 24 %. Forecasts for the next
years indicate that the growth is set to continue,
and that the number of maritime VSAT terminals will
exceed 40,000 by 2018. [/66/]

50 000

40 000
Counted
Estimated
Maritime VSAT installations

30 000

20 000

10 000

0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 14.  Maritime VSATs in service by year 2008-2018. Source: © COMSYS [/66/,/78/]

Gbps

14 Ka-band
Ku-band
12
C-band

10

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Figure 15.  Maritime VSAT bandwidth utilization by frequency band. [/79/]


When it comes to capacity, Euroconsult expects that
with the launch of currently announced HTS systems,
the Ku/Ka-band HTS capacity available over ocean
regions will increase from approximately 15GHz
in 2013 to approximately 90GHz in 2016, a six-fold
increase in raw capacity. Taking into account how
the new capacity will be deployed and demand side
effects, Euroconsult have calculated that the overall
VSAT bandwidth utilization over maritime regions
will increase from 2.4 Gbps in 2011 to 12 Gbps in
2016 [/65/, /79/]. An increase of a factor 5 in 5 years
corresponds to a hefty annual growth rate of 38 %,
which is in line with the exponential growth laws of
Nielsen, Edholm, and Cooper.
In 2013, MSS operators (L-band) accounted
for 67 % of maritime revenues at the satellite
operator level, while FSS operators (VSAT) only
had 33 %. Euroconsult predicts that the situation
will be reversed by 2023 (70 % VSAT vs 30 % MSS),
due to the emerging HTS systems and increased
competition. [/7/]
The above figures demonstrate that the maritime
sector is in the midst of a connectivity revolution,
in which more and more vessels will become
broadband capable and a massive increase in
available capacity will lead to more competition and
lower cost per transferred Megabyte.
SYSTEM SENSE & PROCESS
Monitoring signals
MAINTENANCE
Figure 16.  Condition monitoring process. [/2/]
Ship Connectivity 27
New applications
The new communication capabilities and the
increase in available bandwidth will be an enabler
for the real-time transfer of significant amounts data
from ship to shore and vice versa. In this section, the
effects of improved coverage and data transfer rates
on existing applications will be discussed, along with
the introduction of new applications benefiting the
maritime community.
Condition monitoring
Up until now, maritime maintenance practices have
mainly been reactive and time-schedule based.
A preventive maintenance scheme is based on the
assumption that a component has a given lifetime,
after which its failure rate increases. However, lifetime
estimates are uncertain, and, in practice, failure rate
patterns tend to be random rather age-related. This
calls for a reliability-centred maintenance (RCM)
framework, where the actual conditions of the
components are monitored, and used as decision
input for maintenance actions, thereby achieving
more targeted and cost-efficient maintenance.
As discussed in /2/, condition monitoring has been
widely and actively adopted in aviation in the last
decades, and is a probably a key contributor to the
improved safety over the last 20 years.
Diagnostics Prognostics
ANALYZE
28 Ship Connectivity
A conditioning monitoring application is based on
deploying sensors (temperature, vibration, pressure
etc.) appropriate for detecting symptoms of the
failure modes of selected components or systems.
The sensor readings are collected and stored locally
on board the ship, and then pre-processed before
the data are sent to an onshore data centre for
further analysis and long-term storage.
Some condition monitoring products have already
been introduced in the maritime market, for example
US-based ESRG with their OstiaEdge Monitoring
suite. [/69/] Many of the vendors of machinery
and automations systems in maritime are also
establishing condition monitoring systems, e.g. Rolls
Royce’s Hemos [/70/], Wärtsila’s Propulsion Condition
Monitoring [/71/], and ABB’s RDS system [/53/]. The
vendors’ motivation is not only to improve their
maintenance proposition to shipowners, but also to
learn more about their products’ performance in an
actual operational environment in order to improve
future products.
The Japanese SSAP (Smart Ship Application
Platform) project [/72/] and TNO’s iShare@Sea [/73/]
are research initiatives investigating data exchange,
data models, and necessary standards for realizing
condition monitoring in a maritime context.
Classification societies have also introduced class
notations for condition monitoring to replace time-
scheduled surveys. However, although condition-
based monitoring has been proven to be more
effective in other industries, implementation in the
maritime industry has been slow. A major reason is
that the communication link has been a bottleneck
in terms of cost and bandwidth, because of the high
data volumes resulting from aggregation of raw
data from many sensors sampled at high frequency.
Another challenge is the complexity of maintaining
a well-functioning condition monitoring system.
However, improved connectivity, providing increased
bandwidth at reduced cost, will become an enabler
for a bandwidth-hungry application like condition
monitoring. Once the data have been transferred to
shore, the complexity challenge can be overcome
by facilitating shore support in terms of expertise,
data feeds, analytics, and increased computational
power, thereby accelerating the implementation of
condition monitoring from ships.
Remote maintenance
Deployment of condition monitoring applications
as decision support tools will enable smarter and
more effective maintenance, but ship connectivity
will also enable remote diagnostics and even remote
maintenance of the different components and
systems on board.
Carl Magne Rustand, product manager for
Navigation products in Kongsberg Maritime Offshore
says [/81/]:
“A significant part of the cost for a service
trip is related to travel of service-personnel.
KM has established local offices at strategic
locations around the world to mitigate this,
but still cost and time of service is a challenge
to the industry. Remote diagnostics will
significantly reduce the need for travel. Many
services can be carried out remotely from
Support Centers without physical presence on-
board. Moreover, the efficiency of service trips
can be improved by ensuring that the service
engineer is prepared for the right task when he
comes on-board. With improved connectivity
and proper security measures, our vision is to
avoid many service trips by diagnosing and
fixing problems remotely and thereby reduce
the service cost for our customers as well as
warranty cost for the company.”
In addition to cost savings, remote maintenance
will also reduce downtime and increase profitability
for the ship operator. Service quality will also be
improved, as problems will be diagnosed and
resolved more quickly and effectively when the
service personnel can log in and carry out the work
from their home office.
Although some problems, e.g., broken hardware,
may require manual actions on board, it is not
difficult to envisage how, in the future, an expert
service engineer will remotely guide a crew
member to perform various manual tasks under
close supervision in interactive video sessions using
augmented reality technology. Google Glass [/67/]
and DAQRI’s smart helmet [/68/] are early examples
of the types of products that the future may bring to
support remote maintenance.
Risk-based classification and surveys
During a vessel’s life cycle, classification societies
and flag states perform surveys on board at regular
intervals as a basis for renewal of certificates. The
surveys conducted are typically based on fixed
lists of items to be manually checked or visually
inspected on board. Such surveys can be made
smarter and more effective by using operational
data from the vessel. Ship connectivity could be

Figure 17.  DAQRI’s smart helmet contains an integrated display, camera, and sensors.
Source: http://daqri.com/
used to transfer relevant operational data to shore
(to the flag state or classification society) prior to the
survey, allowing the surveyor to analyse the vessel’s
operational performance before going on board.
This would enable a more risk-based survey to be
conducted, where the attention could be focused
on those items for which the recent operational data
had indicated potential problems.
Such operational data could be the output of a
condition monitoring system giving information
about the health status of different components,
but could also be the logs of operational data
documenting how the vessel has been operated, e.g.
alarm logs, load figures of different components etc.
In addition to the benefits from more purpose-fit,
risk-based surveys, live reporting of operational
data could also enable some verification items
to be conducted entirely remotely, which, in turn,
may decrease the scope of surveys or prolong the
intervals between surveys, thereby increasing the
availability of the ship.
Energy efficiency optimisation
A key concern of shipowners is keeping fuel costs
down, as these are a major part of the operational
cost picture. There are already a number of players
Ship Connectivity 29
offering solutions and advisory services to help
shipowners save on fuel costs.
The class societies are also increasing their focus on
energy efficiency:
¾¾ Class NK and Napa’s Green product portfolio
includes fuel consumption optimization through
speed profile, engine configuration, and route
recommendations, as well as trim optimization
system data from the onboard Loading Computer.
[/32/]
¾¾ DNV GL recently launched its performance
management portal, ECO Insight, providing
dashboards for managing the performance of a
fleet, including voyage, hull & propeller, engine &
systems performance. [/33/]
Energy optimization services are also provided by
engine manufacturers and system integrators, such
as Rolls Royce and Wärtsila. In addition, many niche
players are entering the market to provide different
kinds of data analytics. One example is Marorka.
Their onboard product is an energy monitoring
system installed to log, track, and analyse more
than 500 data sources, including fuel consumption,
speed, weather, and draft. [/34/]
30 Ship Connectivity
Rolls Royce’s Promas Lite propeller/rudder system
The system integrates the propeller and the rudder
into a single system. Behind a normal propeller hub
there is a strong low pressure vortex (hub vortex)
that acts on the propeller hub, increasing drag and
reducing propeller thrust. A special hubcap fitted
to the propeller streamlines the flow onto a bulb
that is added to the rudder, effectively reducing
flow separation immediately after the propeller. This
results in an increase in propeller thrust, as previously
wasted energy is recovered from the flow. According
to Rolls Royce, fuel consumption reductions of
5-15 % are possible, depending on the vessel’s
operating profile.
Source: Rolls-Royce AB [/82/]
A commonality in all the applications above is
that they rely on the regular transfer of status data
from the vessel, thus relying on ship connectivity.
Improvements in ship to shore connectivity will
enable more advanced and accurate services related
to energy efficiency optimization, based on higher
data resolution with increased accuracy and more
advanced analytics algorithms. Increased accuracy
and resolution is required for determining whether
operational or technical measures implemented
for improving efficiency have been effective. For
example, reliable verification of the effects of an
energy saving device such as the Promas Lite
system (see fact box) will require high resolution
measurements, recorded at high sampling rates for
all the relevant operational modes, thus driving data
volumes and bandwidth requirements.
Environmental monitoring
The annual global emissions from shipping are
1 billion tonnes, accounting for 3 % of the world’s
total greenhouse gas emissions, and there is strong
international pressure to reduce emissions of CO2,
NOx and SOx from maritime transportation. [/35/]
EU and IMO are currently working on establishing
new regulations and guidelines for a Monitoring,
Reporting and Verification (MRV) regime, and the
European Commission has proposed that owners
of all large ships (over 5 000 gross tons) using EU
ports should report their verified emissions. IMO has
also made a Ship Energy Efficiency Management
Plan (SEEMP) that is mandatory for all ships, as well
as guidelines for a standardized Energy Efficiency
Operational Indicator (EEOI). [/36/,/37/] The US also has
a strong focus on avoiding emissions, and additional
domestic requirements are imposed for vessels
entering US waters through legislation from US Coast
Guard (USCG) and Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). [/6/]
The detailed reporting requirements are still under
development, and the initial provisions are based on
manual filling in of web-forms based on estimated
consumption, and manual readings from gauges
and logbooks. In order to increase data quality and
reliability and to relieve the crew from unnecessary
administrative burdens, we expect to see a push
for mandatory automated measuring and reporting
systems, using the vessel’s communications system
to transmit reliable emissions data to the relevant
authorities in a timely manner. In order to ensure
fair enforcement of legislation and to ensure that
the correct decisions are reached in terms of

implementation of effective measures and legislation
for environmental purposes, the transparency of
such data is also important.
Another potential environmental application would
be using vessels as sailing weather stations. If an
advanced weather station is fitted on a vessel,
relevant data may be transmitted regularly to an
onshore data centre, for further analysis or data
sharing. If many vessels participate, a network
with continuous feeds of weather data from many
locations would be created. This could become a
meteorological Big Data application in which the
collated data could be used to calibrate weather
models and improve weather forecasts.
Safety applications
The maritime community expends enormous effort
in preserving safety in the design requirements for
the vessels themselves (e.g. hull requirements) and
their onboard systems required for various safety
purposes (e.g. navigation systems or fire detection
systems). These requirements are typically verified
by flag states and classification societies during
the new building process. Nevertheless, during
operation the safety aspects are largely left to a
vessel’s captain and crew. However, systems can fail
during operations and humans make errors. Given
that human error is said to be the cause of up to
85 % of all maritime accidents, it is paradoxical that
shipowners, classification societies, and authorities
do not use operational data from vessels to monitor
and improve safety.
Ship connectivity is an enabler for new safety
applications based on operational data from vessels.
Examples include:
¾¾ Live monitoring of safety systems: This could
determine the integrity and status of various safety
systems; perhaps some fire detectors are offline,
some watertight doors are kept open too often, or
maybe the Electronic Chart Display & Information
System (ECDIS) uses an obsolete version of maps.
Although bridge personnel already have access
to these data, sending it to shore will enable the
shore personnel to help the crew to discover
problems early, and also provide an opportunity
to analyse and learn from historical data.
¾¾ Emergency services: During emergencies and
search & rescue operations considerable effort
goes into communication in order to establish
the status, so that the relevant shore parties can
provide appropriate support and guidance. In
Ship Connectivity 31
such situations, the shore parties could benefit
from additional data being transferred live from
the vessel. For example, they could find it useful
to know the status of the navigation system and
safety systems (e.g. fire and flooding status),
stability information from the vessel’s loading
computer, and possibly video streams from
strategic positions on board the vessel.
¾¾ VDR-in-the-cloud; The VDR (Voyage Data
Recorder) stores essential safety-related data in
each vessel’s black box, to be preserved for post-
accident analysis. However, this data could be
sent to shore on a regular basis, giving a network
backup in the case the VDR is not found after an
accident. Similar considerations are being made
in the aviation sector.
We are already beginning to see new service
offerings along these lines, especially in the cruise /
passenger vessel segment, where safety is in focus.
For example, NAPA’s Emergency Computer offers
live status information on watertight doors and
flooding sensors as support for decision-making and
recovery actions in different accident situations. [/38/]
e-Navigation and the Maritime Cloud
The concept of e-Navigation was initially introduced
by IMO to increase safety and security in commercial
shipping by improving data organization and also
data exchange and communication between ship
and shore. The scope of e-Navigation, as defined by
the IMO and formulated by IALA, is “the harmonized
collection, integration, exchange, presentation and
analysis of marine information on-board and ashore by
electronic means to enhance berth to berth navigation
and related services for safety and security at sea and
for protection of the marine environment.” [/43/]
In the recently approved Strategy Implementation
Plan (SIP), three of the five prioritized e-navigation
solutions are directly related to communication:
¾¾ S2: means for standardized and automated
reporting;
¾¾ S4: integration and presentation of available
information in graphical displays received via
communications equipment; and
¾¾ S9: improved communication of VTS Service
Portfolio.
32 Ship Connectivity
Figure 18.  Maritime Cloud infrastructure. Source: DMA [/54/]
The SIP assumes that existing GMDSS systems, other
commercially available systems e.g. VSAT, Iridium,
and terrestrial alternatives, as well as future systems,
e.g. VDES, could be used. [/44/]:
The Danish Maritime Authority (DMA) recently
proposed the Maritime Cloud as a digital IT-
framework of standards, infrastructure, and
governance to facilitate secure interoperable
information exchange between stakeholders in
the maritime community. The Maritime Cloud
consists of components such as the “Maritime
Service Portfolio Registry” that holds information
about service capabilities and associated providers
and subscriptions, and the “Maritime Identity
Registry” that holds maritime identities and provides
basic methods for authentication, integrity, and
confidentiality. A Maritime Messaging Service
has also been defined to provide seamless and
communication carrier agnostic messaging capability
between ships, and between ships and shore. [/54/]
The Maritime Cloud has received considerable
attention and support in e-Navigation forums, and
may play an important role for future connectivity
applications.
Another interesting e-Navigation initiative is CMDS
(Common Maritime Data Structure) that is to be
based on in the IHO S-100 format. S-100 is based
on the ISO 19100 series of geographic information
standards. While ISO 19100 is mainly intended for
geospatial data, it is believed that S-100 will also be
able to handle other types of data. [/47/]
Nevertheless, robust and reliable communication is
essential for e-Navigation services, and thus these
initiatives benefit from the current ship connectivity
revolution.
Remote control and autonomy
Increased reliability and capacity of data transfer can
enable applications related to flow of information,
but may also have the potential for introducing
capabilities for controlling ship functions from shore.
Remote control of vessel functions will have intensive
requirements regarding the communication link to
the vessel. Firstly, the connection needs broadband
in order to be able to transfer sufficient amount of
information to the onshore operator and back to the
vessel. The bandwidth requirements for the forward link
will be smaller as it will be mainly control commands

Figure 19.  ReVolt – DNV GL’s unmanned, battery-powered concept vessel.
Source: DNV GL © Toftenes Multivisjon AS
from pilot to vessel. Secondly, as loss of communication
will result in loss of ability to control the vessel, the
communication system must be highly reliable.
Furthermore, the connection should have low latency
to avoid an introduced lag impeding reaction times,
which may be critical for adequate response times.
Autonomous onboard systems may, in principal, not
need any control communication, but most concepts
still include some level of monitoring and control,
and typically the possibility for full manual override
(i.e., remote control) from shore.
A key aspect of autonomy and remote control
applications is reliance on a robust and dependable
communication link. This could be solved by
redundancy and diversity, e.g. by use of several
independent communication systems in order
to maximize the availability of communications.
When communication is lost, a fail-safe logic
could be applied, so that the autonomous system
configures the vessel to the safest possible state until
communication is restored.
The EC-funded project MUNIN (Maritime
Unmanned Navigation through Intelligence in
Ship Connectivity 33
Networks) is a collaborative research project that
aims at developing and verifying a concept for an
autonomous ship, primarily guided by automated
onboard decision systems, but controlled by a
remote operator in a shoreside control station. [/39/]
The consortium of eight partners, led by Fraunhofer
CML, will consider operational, technical, and
legal aspects in connection with the vision of an
autonomous ship.
Other research initiatives include the Japan-based Eco
Marine Power’s Aquarius, a prototype of an unmanned
surface vessel intended for lightweight tasks like
surveys, surveillance, and data monitoring.[/40/].
DNV GLs “ReVolt” is an unmanned short sea shipping
concept. This battery-powered concept vessel has
increased loading capacity due to the removal of
crew facilities and will use ECDIS, GPS, radar, Lidar,
and cameras as sensor signals for its automated
operation. [/41/]
Researchers at Munin-partner Marintek have
estimated that a 3-4 Mbps broadband connection
will ensure effective communication between
the vessel and the control room, and believe that
34 Ship Connectivity
unmanned 200 m cargo vessels will be sailing the
oceans within 10-20 years. [/42/] Even if unmanned
ships in commercial use are still some years into the
future, many projects testing out novel concepts for
decision support, remote control, and autonomy
should be expected in the coming years, and we
anticipate a gradual adoption of autonomy as more
and more functions become automated and/or
shore-controlled, reducing the current necessary
levels of crewing.
New challenges
Capacity limitations
Assuming that all the new systems and
communication capacity become available, overall
capacity and user data rates will keep rising,
whilst costs continue to fall. However, maritime
communication remains wireless and relies on sharing
a limited physical resource; spectrum.
The exponential growth laws discussed earlier
do not fulfil themselves, and, as Martin Cooper
postulated, continued innovations and technological
developments are necessary in order to grow the
available bandwidth further. [/64/] Although smarter
antennae, more powerful satellites, and novel modem
techniques will gradually allow better utilization of the
spectrum, the maritime offerings cannot be compared
with terrestrial broadband, where fibre cables provide
data rates in the Gbps range at low cost to enterprises
and households. Also, considering the cost picture
associated with launching and maintaining a satellite
system or terrestrial system with maritime coverage,
there are limits regarding how cheaply the operators
are able to sell their airtime.
Thanks to the ship connectivity revolution and new
HTS systems, the situation will be much better than in
the past. However, at least in the short-term, we should
expect communication to continue to be perceived
as a bottleneck in terms of cost and capacity. The
consequence is that maritime applications must be
smart and bandwidth-efficient. Taking condition
monitoring as an example, uploading data from all
sensors on a continuous basis cannot be expected, as
this will consume too much of a vessel’s broadband
capacity. Countermeasures may include compression,
pre-processing, and smart transmission schedules,
which could be provided by a communication broker
as discussed earlier. For example, the application may
send a short status messages on a live basis, and defer
upload of the full set of raw data until triggered by a
risk event or by availability of a cheap connection, e.g.
Wi-Fi in port.
Availability and robustness
Ship connectivity will enable a range of new
applications. As applications rely progressively
on communication, it is clear that the criticality
of communications equipment will increase. This
elevated criticality will, in turn, call for tougher
requirements regarding the availability and reliability
of the communication systems used for the new
applications. IMO has laid down stringent technical
and performance requirements for the GMDSS
safety communication bearers, but for so-called
voluntary communication systems, such as VSAT, no
requirements or type approval regimes exist, at least
not in the statutory domain.
Until IMO, flag states, or classification societies
decide to fill this “vacuum” by defining regulations
and standards for new communication systems,
shipowners, yards, and vendors are left to set
their own requirements prior to purchase of
communications systems.
Availability figures are typically high for satellite
communication, for example Inmarsat has a stated
target of 99.9 % for their legacy L-band network. The
availability of satellite systems operating on Ku- and
Ka-band will typically be lower due to rain fades. An
availability figure of 99 % or 99.9 % will be acceptable
for most applications, but for some applications,
e.g. remote control or safety applications, loss of
connectivity, even for short periods, will be critical.
Availability may be increased by redundancy, e.g.
parallel operation of two satellite terminals with similar
capabilities; however, in order to avoid the satellite
or the satellite gateway becoming single points of
error this parallel operation should not go through
the same satellite system. Backing up a satellite
connection with a terrestrial connection, such as
3G or 4G, is another alternative providing diversity.
Broker solutions handling different underlying
communication bearers, as discussed earlier, may be
used to realize the redundancy implementation.
Availability and reliability of communication will be
even more important as new Arctic shipping routes
are enabled due to melting of the Polar ice. With Geo-
based L-band and VSATs struggling beyond 70-75º
North, non-Geo systems will be needed to provide
reliable connectivity along these routes. Iridium is
an existing alternative, but in the future we may also
see new systems using highly elliptical orbit (HEO) to
provide satellite connectivity in Polar regions.

NORTHWEST PASSAGE
San Fransisco
Current route
Figure 20.  New shipping routes enabled by melting of the Polar ice.
The headaches of system integration
In the era of ship connectivity, systems on board a
vessel will become increasingly integrated.
For navigational systems on the bridge, integration
has already been going on for several years in
order to allow more efficient implementation and
to provide a more user-friendly environment for
the navigator. The same trends are seen for control
systems, automation systems, and safety systems,
and the ship connectivity revolution will lead to
communication systems becoming increasingly
integrated with other systems on the bridge.
For example, the ECDIS system depends on
communication in order to obtain map downloads
and updates on navigational hazards from shore.
System integration enables new service capabilities,
but at the same time new challenges are created:
¾¾ System interdependencies; a failure in one system
propagates to another, and one application in the
network may affect other applications due to the
use of shared resources.
¾¾ Complexity in design; due to the
interdependencies, the requirements for an
integrated system will typically include aspects
such as redundancy, prioritization, resource
allocation schemes, and handling of network
and interface failures. This makes design and
requirements definition more challenging.
Ship Connectivity 35
NORTHERN SEA ROUTE
Rotterdam
Yokohama
Current route
¾¾ Complexity in verification & testing; when systems
are integrated they cannot be tested in isolation,
calling for more complex test infrastructure and
methods.
¾¾ Non-transparent black boxes; given free hands,
vendors combining many products into one
integrated system may choose to implement
proprietary protocols or hide the internal
interfaces. This may prevent operators and testers
having access to and interpreting essential
operational data.
The challenges above all call for the definition of
requirements and standard setting at the network
level and the component level, as well as for the key
interfaces.
A success story showing how this can be managed is
the integration of navigation systems on the bridge.
The maritime community has established effective
IMO requirements and International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC) standards for INS (Integrated
Navigation System), BAMS (Bridge Alarm System),
and the interfaces between different systems (IEC
61162-family).
36 Ship Connectivity
Big Data challenges
Ship connectivity is an enabler of the “Internet of
Things” and “Big Data” for maritime, resulting in a
number of “Big Data” related challenges [/1/];
¾¾ “Data swamping”: A well-known Big Data problem
is “swamping” with overwhelming amounts
of raw data. 1000 sensors on board a vessel
sampled at 1 Hz will produce 31,5 billion data
points annually, and if each data point is 8 bytes
and a fleet consists of 30 vessels, the shipowner
will accumulate 7,6 TB of sensor data every year.
In order to achieve efficient use of storage and
communication capacity, smart pre-processing
and compression schemes are needed.
¾¾ ICT infrastructure design aspects: Where to store
the raw data – on the vessel or onshore? Different
solutions may be needed for intermediate-term
and long-term storage. Should there be multiple
data collectors or one centralized data collection
facility on the vessel? What is necessary regarding
the design and functionality of an onshore data
centre?
¾¾ Data analytics: Many of the new data-driven
applications will require data analytics that are
capable of converting large amounts of cryptic
raw data into compact, actionable data that are
suitable for automation or operational decision-
making. In many cases the physical processes
behind the data are not well-understood, so
analytical methods are needed to derive patterns
of behaviour and build a model from the data.
Data mining and machine learning techniques
may be used for this purpose.
¾¾ Data quality: Another challenge is ensuring the
integrity and accuracy of the data. Several factors
may contribute; sensor accuracy, compatibility
of interfaces, the potential for communication
outages causing loss of data and incomplete data
sets, the requirement for the metadata necessary
to interpret and process the raw data correctly,
and the possibility of accidental data insertion,
updating, or deletion by analysts or unauthorized
individuals. Any new data-driven application
must include protection against such data quality
problems.
¾¾ Access control and cybersecurity: In an open
and integrated data landscape, where data are
expected to be easily accessible, it is important
to ensure that only the intended users have
access, and that the data are protected from
eavesdropping and tampering. One particular
fear is that critical vessel functions, such as
engine controls or navigation systems, could
become the targets for cyber-attacks from shore.
According to research by the Greenwich Maritime
Institute, cybersecurity concerns are a major
reason for the slow uptake of Wi-Fi and WiMAX
networks in ports [/25/]. Proper access control and
security schemes must be in place for the Data
Analysis Centres onshore, as well as the vessels
themselves.
The above aspects need to be addressed by design
requirements and operational measures, as well as
by new standards.
Lack of standards
Regulators and standard setters have not yet made
their entry to the game of “ship connectivity”, and
there is a currently a general lack of standards.
Rule setting and standardization may become
effective countermeasures for many of the barriers
identified above;
¾¾ New standards and regulations can define
functional and performance requirements to
ensure the availability and reliability of the new
communication systems.
¾¾ System integration challenges can be tackled
with well-defined network requirements and
standardized interfaces.
¾¾ Big Data challenges, such as data quality and
cybersecurity, can be effectively mitigated by
documenting and spreading best practices as
standards.
These are some specific areas where standards are
currently missing:
¾¾ Non-GMDSS communications standards: Unlike
GMDSS, where IMO and IEC have defined
functional, performance, and test requirements,
little or nothing exists for non-GMDSS systems
to ensure that the communication component
can support new applications, e.g. with respect
to coverage, availability, and latency. It is also
challenging to determine the right level of
detail and approach to such standards. As new
technologies and systems are introduced at
an increasing pace, it is difficult for standard
setters to keep up with making highly detailed
and bearer-specific standards. A more flexible
Ship Connectivity 37
38 Ship Connectivity
approach in which over-arching standards are
defined, focusing on high level performance and
functional aspects, may be more future-proof.
¾¾ Data-related standards: Ship connectivity
applications will benefit from:
-- Standardized data collection equipment to
achieve a common infrastructure to be used
for gathering different data from the various
sources on board the ship.
-- Standards for data formats and interfaces to
allow integration and interworking between
systems from different vendors.
-- Standardized ontology and data models
for maritime data (e.g., ship building and
operational voyage data) to form a common
language to support automated applications
and data exchange between different parties.
Although standards for many aspects of the new
ship connectivity applications are lacking, every
module and function need not be subjected to
standardization, as application designers and service
operators need some freedom to differentiate
their service offerings. Thus, this needs to be
carefully balanced with the benefits associated with
establishing common definitions and systematics.
E-Navigation is recognized as a promising arena for
standard making, e.g. through initiatives like VDES,
Maritime Cloud, and CMDS, but there presently
remains a standard challenge which, if not dealt with,
may result in fragmented and proprietary solutions,
preventing economies of scale and inhibiting the
uptake of ship connectivity applications.
Legal and commercial challenges
The new data-driven applications enabled by
ship connectivity will create legal and commercial
challenges:
¾¾ Data ownership: Who owns the data legally? As a
starting point, shipowners will claim that they own
any operational data that are produced by the
systems that they have purchased and installed
on board their vessels. However, shipowners
may enter into agreements to share those data,
e.g. to a vendor of machinery to provide better
maintenance.

¾¾ Responsibility: Does access to data bring with it a
responsibility regarding detection of problems?
Who is liable if errors that are evident in the data
are not detected? Leaving the legal aspects aside,
there is also a cultural aspect; anyone providing
data for analysis may feel less responsible and
become more passive than if a monitoring
arrangement was not in place. In order to avoid
role confusion and misunderstandings, any
data-sharing arrangement should contain clear
definitions on roles, rights, and obligations in the
use of the shared data.
¾¾ Competence: The era of ship connectivity
and Big Data will require new data-related
skills and competencies such as general IT
expertise, data modelling, data analytics, data
security, and data quality and communications
technology. The traditional maritime disciplines
and domain knowledge will still be needed, but
the domain experts must also bear in mind how
to utilize connectivity and data when defining
new requirements or systems. For example, a
machinery designer should consider sensor
placement and sensor data flow as part of the
design work, and a class surveyor should consider
Ship Connectivity 39
which operational data streams and analysis
tools are appropriate to verify compliance with
applicable rules. The key will be combining new
data skills with legacy maritime domain expertise.
¾¾ New business roles and models: The novel data-
driven applications will shape a new business
landscape, with opportunities for fresh players
as well as the incumbents. New companies
specializing in data analytics or hosting Big Data
reported from the ship or other sources should
be expected to emerge. For example ESRG [/69/]
specializes in data analytics and remote condition
monitoring for maritime. Business models and
roles will probably settle with time, but in the
transition phase we may see a dynamic situation
in which some emerging players will grow quickly
and the incumbents who are unwilling to change
will suffer
40 Ship Connectivity
OPPORTUNITIES
AHEAD
The era of ship connectivity will provide a range of
new opportunities for all players in the maritime
community;
¾¾ Shipowners and operators: to improve cost-
efficiency and reduce downtime due to smarter
vessels equipped with advanced ICT and sensor
systems. Gain more insight and learn from how
the onboard systems are performing, and how
they are operated by the crew. Use operational
data to undertake analyses and comparisons
between vessels in order to deploy best practices
across the fleet. Attract the best crew by offering
Internet connectivity. Provide better support
from shore offices to the vessel and crew. Deploy
monitoring and automation to save crew costs
and to provide a safer, more interesting workplace
for the remaining crew.
¾¾ Crew: to enjoy improved welfare and a more
interesting workplace. Internet access improves
keeping in touch with those at home, reducing the
barrier for long voyages. New safety applications
and better onshore support make the vessel a
safer workplace.
¾¾ Yards and ship equipment vendors: to design
and sell smarter and more advanced vessels
to owners, and offer better and more cost-
efficient maintenance and value-adding services
to owners. Gain more insights and learn more
about the operational performance of own
vessels (or systems) in order to improve design or
manufacturing.
¾¾ Marine authorities and regulators: to update and
modernize regulations and standards to gain
better control and improve maritime safety and
environmental performance. Deploy reliable
and automatic reporting applications instead
of manual, hand-written reports. Achieve more
efficient and reliable operational communication
with vessels.
¾¾ Classification societies: to upgrade rules,
standards, and classification services to benefit
from connectivity and operational data available,
with the view to improving safety in ship design
and operations. Should look for new ways to
apply their maritime domain knowledge and risk
management expertise.
¾¾ Charterers and cargo owners: to get better and
more dynamic insights into the whereabouts
and condition of their cargo. This transparency
may help improve cargo conditions and assist in
optimizing cargo logistics; it may also be used to
verify compliance with charterer contracts.

¾¾ Insurers: to get better insights into the technical
condition of vessels and how they are being
operated, which, in turn, may be used to
differentiate insurance pricing and incentivize safe
sailing.
¾¾ Communications operators and vendors: to
capture the potential of an increasing maritime
market segment for communication.
¾¾ Academia: to develop and apply new
methodologies to support maritime applications,
Ship Connectivity 41
e.g. data mining solutions and analytics methods.
This opportunity is especially relevant for ICT
disciplines, but other fields of research will also
be relevant depending on the nature of the data
made available from the ships.
¾¾ New players: to grasp the opportunity to
perform onshore analytics, hosting of operational
vessel data, and any new roles enabled by ship
connectivity.
42 Ship Connectivity

CONCLUSIONS
In this paper we have discussed ship connectivity, its
drivers, benefits, and challenges.
Historically, safety has been the main driver for
maritime communication with focus on voice and
distress signalling, supported by narrow-band
communication methods. The current drivers are
more diverse. Shipowners today invest in advanced
broadband satellite communications in order to offer
welfare and entertainment to the crew and to gain
commercial benefits, with operational applications
requiring communications with shore.
Over the last decade, we have seen a remarkable
growth in broadband satellite installations on board
larger vessels, and several upcoming new HTS
initiatives will fuel this growth by providing a massive
increase in bandwidth available for maritime users.
Within the next few years, a highly competitive
marketplace will emerge, with a variety of products,
different offerings, and lower prices.
This revolution in ship connectivity will reduce
existing barriers and enable the implementation of
many new applications for maritime users. These
new applications will include condition monitoring,
energy efficiency, and autonomy, making shipping
smarter and more cost-efficient. Yards, maritime
equipment vendors, classification societies, and
new players will identify opportunities for improving
Ship Connectivity 43
maintenance schemes and developing new services
based on operational data that will be transferred
to shore on a live basis. As more and more vessels
become “connected” via broadband, concepts such
as “Big Data” and the “Internet of Things” will soon
become a reality in the maritime business.
Ship connectivity also provides a unique
opportunity for maritime authorities to upgrade
existing regulations to improve safety and achieve
environmental targets.
Although the future growth of maritime
communications looks certain, these new initiatives
and technologies may also cause problems and
disruptions. Potential game changers may include
satellite imaging, new antenna technologies,
innovative applications of terrestrial technology such
as Wi-Fi or 4G, or maybe a new speculative satellite
initiative will succeed by doing things differently.
In order to realize the potential benefits to be
obtained from ship connectivity some important
challenges must be tackled. Regulators and standard
setters should define requirements and standards to
ensure that availability and reliability are sufficient,
and define service architectures and interfaces
to allow quality verifications and to stimulate a
competitive vendor market.
44 Ship Connectivity

REFERENCES

/1/ DNV GL Position Paper “4-2014 “Big Data – the new data /22/ http://www.mcp.com/press-release-mcp-to-transform-
reality and industry impact.” mobile-communication-on-norwegian-continental-shelf-
with-4g-rollout/
/2/ DNV GL position paper 6-2014 “Beyond Condition
monitoring in the maritime industry” /23/ http://www.mpa.gov.sg/sites/global_navigation/
news_center/mpa_news/mpa_news_detail.
/3/ SOLAS
page?filename=nr080306.xml
/4/ http://www.intelsat.com
/24/ http://www.whatsag.com/G/Understanding_WiMAX.php
/5/ http://www.imo.org
/25/ http://www.porttechnology.org/images/uploads/
/6/ http://www.epa.gov/otaq/oceanvessels.htm technical_papers/PT51-23.pdf

/7/ Fargier/Li, Euroconsult: “VSAT competition drives /26/ https://www.ice.no

evolution in maritime satcoms”, Digital Ship September
/27/ http://thuraya.com/marine-comms
2014 p.26
/28/ http://www.orbcomm.com
/8/ http://www.iridium.com
/29/ http://www.on-waves.com
/9/ http://www.inmarsat.com
/30/ http://www.mcp.com/
/10/ http://www.intelsat.com/infrastructure/intelsat-epicng/
/31/ http://www.marinesatellitesystems.com/index.php?page_
/11/ http://www.o3bnetworks.com
id=113
/12/ http://www.satellogic.com/
/32/ http://www.napa.fi/Ship-Operations/ClassNK-NAPA-
/13/ http://www.telenorsat.com GREEN-Optimization

/14/ http://www.telesat.com /33/ http://www.dnvgl.com/news-events/news/eco-insight.

/15/ http://www.viasat.com
/16/ https://iridium.com/About/IndustryLeadership/Iridium-
Certus-Broadband.aspx
/17/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTE_(telecommunication)
/18/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OneWeb_satellite_
constellation
/19/ http://www.iflscience.com/technology/spacex-will-soon-
be-launching-satellites-unfettered-low-cost-internet
/20/ https://twitter.com/elonmusk
/21/ http://www.telenor.no/privat/dekning/dekning_data.jsp
aspx
/34/ http://www.marorka.com/products/
/35/ http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/shipping/
index_en.htm
/36/ MEPC.1/Circ.684 ”Guidelines for voluntary use of the ship
energy efficiency operational indicator (EEOI)”
/37/ http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/
PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Pages/Technical-and-
Operational-Measures.aspx
/38/ http://www.napa.fi/Ship-Operations/Emergency-
Computer
 Ship Connectivity 45

/39/ http://www.unmanned-ship.org/munin/ /65/ http://www.satmagazine.com/story.

/40/ http://www.ecomarinepower.com/en/aquarius-usv
/41/ http://www.dnvgl.com/news-events/news/revolt.aspx
/42/ http://www.sintef.no/home/news-from-gemini.no/Ships-
without-skippers
/43/ http://www.iala-aism.org/committees/enav.html
/44/ http://www.kystverket.no/Documents/e-navigation/
Doc%201%20SIP.pdf
/45/ http://www.kymetacorp.com/technology/
/46/ https://www.apple.com/iphone/LTE/
/47/ http://www.iala-aism.org/technical/s100-product-
specification/index.html
/48/ https://www.iridium.com//About/IridiumNEXT/
Technology.aspx
/49/ http://www.inmarsat.com/service/global-xpress/
/50/ http://www.nkom.no/teknisk/frekvensauksjoner/
auksjoner/planlagte-avsluttede/auksjon-21-900-mhz-
b%C3%A5ndet-offshore
/51/ Hazra, S.K., and Seah, W.K.G. 2010. Topology broadcast
in maritime mesh networks with directional antennas
–A practical approach. 16th AsiaPacific Conference on
Communications (APCC)
php?number=770677819
/66/ The COMSYS Maritime VSAT Report 4th Edition, http://
www.comsys.co.uk
/67/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Glass
/68/ http://hardware.daqri.com/smarthelmet/
/69/ http://www.esrgtech.com/
/70/ Rolls Royce, analytics for better avalibility: http://www.
rolls-royce.com/about/publications/marine/indepth/16/
index.html (page 57)
/71/ “Remote engine monitoring for vessels increases – and
now extends to ship propulsion”, Wärtsilä article May
2013: http://www.wartsila.com/en/remote-engine-
monitoring-for-vessels-increases-and-now-extends-to-
shippropulsion
/72/ http://www.e-navigation.net/index.php?page=ssap-
smart-ship-application-platform
/73/ https://www.tno.nl/en/about-tno/news/2014/3/
data-standard-at-the-heart-of-innovative-maritime-
maintenance/
/74/ http://www.iala-aism.org/files/conference/18th_iala_
conference_2014_report_final.pdf/76/
/75/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11

/52/ Bitner-Gregersen, E.M., Ellermann, K., Ewans, K.C., /76/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/inmarsat

Falzarano, J. M.,Johnson, M. C., Nielsen Dam, U. , Nilva,
/77/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very-small-aperture_terminal
A., Queffeulou, P., Smith, T. W. P.,and Waseda, T. (2009).
Committee I.1 Environment. Proc. 17th ISCC 2009 /78/ Adrian Bull (COMSYS), 2015, personal communications
Congress, 16-21 August 2009, Seoul, Korea
/79/ Capucine Fargier (Euroconsult), fargier@euroconsult-ec.
/53/ http://new.abb.com/marine/news-and-highlights/rds-in- com, 2015, personal communications
newbuilds
/80/ Peter Broadhurst (Inmarsat), 2015, personal
/54/ https://dma-enav.atlassian.net/wiki/display/MCCT/ communications
Maritime+Cloud
/81/ Carl Magne Rustand (Kongsberg Maritime Offshore),
/55/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_satellite_ 2015, personal communications
development_facility
/82/ http://www.rolls-royce.com/customers/marine/services/
/56/ http://seattletimes.com/html/ upgrades/promas-lite.aspx
businesstechnology/2025480750_spacexmuskxml.html
/57/ http://www.skybox.com
/58/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skybox_Imaging
/59/ http://www.nngroup.com/articles/law-of-bandwidth/
/60/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law
/61/ Cherry, Steven, “Telecom: Edholm’s Law of
Bandwidth”,IEEE Spectrum, July 2004
/62/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Cooper_(inventor)
/63/ http://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/wireless/edholms-law-
of-bandwidth
/64/ http://dynallc.com/2010/03/the-myth-of-spectrum-
scarcity-position-paper-by-martin-cooper-march-2010/
46 Ship Connectivity

NOTES
Ship Connectivity 47
48 Ship Connectivity

SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

DNV GL AS DNV GL
NO-1322 Høvik, Norway Driven by its purpose of safeguarding life, property and the environment, DNV GL enables organisations to advance the
Tel: +47 67 57 99 00 safety and sustainability of their business. DNV GL provides classification and technical assurance along with software and
www.dnvgl.com independent expert advisory services to the maritime, oil & gas and energy industries.

It also provides certification services to customers across a wide range of industries. Combining leading technical and
operational expertise, risk methodology and in-depth industry knowledge, DNV GL empowers its customers’ decisions and
actions with trust and confidence. The company continuously invests in research and collaborative innovation to provide
customers and society with operational and technological foresight. DNV GL, whose origins go back to 1864, operates
globally in more than 100 countries with its 16,000 professionals dedicated to helping their customers make the world safer,
smarter and greener.

DNV GL Strategic Research & Innovation

The objective of strategic research is through new knowledge and services to support DNV GL's overall strategy. Such
research is carried out in selected areas that are believed to be of particular significance for DNV GL in the future. A Position
Paper from DNV GL Strategic Research & Innovation is intended to highlight findings from our research programmes.

The trademarks DNV GL and the Horizon Graphic are the property of DNV GL AS. All rights reserved.
Illustrational images: iStockphoto.com Cover image: iStockphoto.com
©DNV GL 05/2015 Design and print production: Erik Tanche Nilssen AS